This commentary is offered in response to the British Educational Research Association (BERA)’s commissioned report on close‐to‐practice research. In conducting a rapid evidence assessment coupled with a small number of qualitative interviews, the report represents an overly dichotomised and partial approach to understanding the relationships between research and practice, and the nature of knowledge generated within such relationships. Specifically, the report fails to adequately address the central importance of collaboration to the generation of knowledge and assumes that knowledge is either academic research or practitioner enquiry, without considering a more integrated, co‐constructed ‘third space’. I argue that practice‐focused research should be fundamentally concerned with making an impact on practice and, therefore, effective collaboration between research and practice necessarily entails grappling with issues of power and democratisation. These are values that underpin and shape research in important ways that must be considered in conceptualisations of methodological quality. I also raise questions about the transparency and quality of decision‐making in the close‐to‐practice BERA report, including whether the six papers identified as ‘high quality’ by the authors would meet their own definition. Their report is not definitive, but rather a catalyst for further discussion. I offer suggestions for some practical steps for how BERA could work to provide a more holistic framing for this vital field of inquiry.